API Curriculum Mod

[BlackBearHockey]

This really confuses me as all I've heard on here is that they're short in SNA/SNFO and are picking a lot of guys up. Question: with higher attrition rates, would that change what would happen when someone fell to attrition? I'm under the impression that under the old system someone was separated, but if they have a large number of people on the way out, would they just start re-designating?

 

[Ducky]

Just a few opinions:

1. A 3 Week API program will suck so yes you will have to bust your ass.

2. If they are not changing the rollback policy its not all that much harder. I was at API during thanksgiving and academics got crammed into 3 weeks anyway.

3. Even with a 3 week schedule study ahead should not mean be able to teach the class like many students attempt to do. It should be read far enough ahead so you can cover the topics being discussed the next day. Come with questions. If you do that you should be fine.

4. To be frankly honest the people I see having the most trouble in primary are the ones that are so worried about getting ahead that they never pull their head out of the book, and in the aircraft they have a brain full of knowledge but can't apply it.

5. IFS ground school(Bay Minnette) was a bigger help with primary than API could ever hope to be.

6. The only concern I have about the 3 week program is further cutting into the already condensed survival course.

 

[SDNalgene]

I'm curious when you went through IFS. From what I've heard here recently, as well as from more recent SNAs at work, IFS is more formalized specfically because of the problems you address here. Just trying to figure out a time w/ your data-point.

I went through IFS in Destin, FL with Miracle Strip Aviation in Feb-Mar 2007. Not a poorly run program at all to be honest, but the instruction just isn't up to par with military instruction by any means. I like the idea of having former military aviators certified as IFS instructors and having more formalized briefs and debriefs. I don't know if that has happened or not since I left then. And yes, it is (or at least was) a board of Naval Aviators who makes the retention decision, but it's based off of performance in training that is not given by Naval Aviators. I don't think that IFS, at least as it existed when I went through, should be cause for attrition, at least not without a military aviator seeing you fly.

 

[magnetfreezer]

I think there would be a few other things that could weed out those who do not have the aptitude for flying. Why not standardize IFS and utilize retired or reserve military aviators? Make it more like a pre-Primary, more formalized than what I have heard about how it is conducted now. The USAF was doing that a few years ago, before the T-3's started falling out of the sky, and I believe the Israeli's and RAF do it that way.

The AF restarted the centralized IFS with mostly retired mil IP's: http://dossifs.com/usaf/incomingstudents.html

in Pueblo for all pilot selects; even those with CFI, commercial, etc ratings are required to complete IFS. Navs are still doing local IFS because of limited class capacity but are eventually all supposed to go through as well.

 

[Gatordev]

I went through IFS in Destin, FL with Miracle Strip Aviation in Feb-Mar 2007. Not a poorly run program at all to be honest, but the instruction just isn't up to par with military instruction by any means. I like the idea of having former military aviators certified as IFS instructors and having more formalized briefs and debriefs. I don't know if that has happened or not since I left then. And yes, it is (or at least was) a board of Naval Aviators who makes the retention decision, but it's based off of performance in training that is not given by Naval Aviators. I don't think that IFS, at least as it existed when I went through, should be cause for attrition, at least not without a military aviator seeing you fly.

From what I've heard from onwings at about your time (and an IP or two who worked w/ IFS), the standardization was tightened up after you went through. I agree w/ all your points. It's not going to be military training, but there does need to be Stan in the instruction, which is the whole point of the FTI ass-pain that is Primary.

 

[RHPF]

From what I've heard from onwings at about your time (and an IP or two who worked w/ IFS), the standardization was tightened up after you went through. I agree w/ all your points. It's not going to be military training, but there does need to be Stan in the instruction, which is the whole point of the FTI ass-pain that is Primary.

Just a couple points of clarity..
There are still 6 locations. Each location has several instructors. It creates a lot of variety. As for standardization, I am currently in IFS and the range of strictness, teaching style, and expectations is extremely wide from one instructor to the next. I imagine that will be a fair representation of Primary, but seeing as I haven't been there I can't speak on that. Also, my guess is that IFS is a good primer for API. As API expands on what is taught in IFS ground school. I would expect attrition to drop accordingly. I fail to see how that is a bad thing. Current gouge being put out is that 'IFS' has directed the schools to attrite more people to show the effectiveness of IFS.

 

[BACONATOR]

From what I've heard from onwings at about your time (and an IP or two who worked w/ IFS), the standardization was tightened up after you went through. I agree w/ all your points. It's not going to be military training, but there does need to be Stan in the instruction, which is the whole point of the FTI ass-pain that is Primary.

Ya, stan is tough. I don't know about IFS, but it sure as hell would be nice if there was SOME manner of stan between the sim instructors... :icon_rage

And I don't mean about grading. I mean about straight-up PROCEDURES. (although grading is all over the map too).

 

[Cavrone]

In the last 2 weeks of API, the day is done around noon anyway. I dont think that the condensed version should be that much tougher because the water survival/physiology could be done in a few long days. Add an extra class or two per day and you cut API by a couple of weeks right there.

 

[SDNalgene]

Ya, stan is tough. I don't know about IFS, but it sure as hell would be nice if there was SOME manner of stan between the sim instructors... :icon_rage

And I don't mean about grading. I mean about straight-up PROCEDURES. (although grading is all over the map too).

Sounds like someone flew the Horseman2 transition recently....

 

[Gatordev]

Just a couple points of clarity..
There are still 6 locations. Each location has several instructors. It creates a lot of variety. As for standardization, I am currently in IFS and the range of strictness, teaching style, and expectations is extremely wide from one instructor to the next. I imagine that will be a fair representation of Primary, but seeing as I haven't been there I can't speak on that. Also, my guess is that IFS is a good primer for API. As API expands on what is taught in IFS ground school. I would expect attrition to drop accordingly. I fail to see how that is a bad thing. Current gouge being put out is that 'IFS' has directed the schools to attrite more people to show the effectiveness of IFS.

By locations, I mean two geographic locations, PNS PTC and the Quantico area. Expectations in Primary will be pretty standard and there's even a book that tells you exactly what's expected.

Ya, stan is tough. I don't know about IFS, but it sure as hell would be nice if there was SOME manner of stan between the sim instructors...

And I don't mean about grading. I mean about straight-up PROCEDURES. (although grading is all over the map too).

That shouldn't be happening for procedures. Hit them on the critiques and BE SPECIFIC. It's not going to be fixed unless you let people know, and that's what the critiques are for (and your debrief w/ the Skipper).

As for grading, suck it up. You're on your own there. I keed (mostly).

 

[SDNalgene]

As for grading, suck it up. You're on your own there. I keed (mostly).

Well part of his problem might be that he is indeed sucking it up. Just sayin'...

 

[BACONATOR]

That shouldn't be happening for procedures. Hit them on the critiques and BE SPECIFIC. It's not going to be fixed unless you let people know, and that's what the critiques are for (and your debrief w/ the Skipper).

As for grading, suck it up. You're on your own there. I keed (mostly).

Roger, and I'll be doing just that in about 2 weeks when I am checking out.

I never had Horseman numero uno, but I had the other ones plenty when I was in RIs.... it was literally that one person would tell me to do one thing and have another instructor bitch at me for doing another. Then DD-175s, I'd get bitched at for doing it the way we were taught, fix it according to the sim instructor's liking, get bitched at in the plane for doing it the "sim way" and fix it for the IP, and then get bitched at by the sim instructors when I went back and did it the IP way.... ridiculous. That is just one example. There were procedures (and techniques) taught one way and get bitched at by another instructor for doing it that way, and possibly even downgraded. "Who taught you to do that?" "Mr. XXX". "Hmm... I'll have to talk to him". Nonesense.

Well part of his problem might be that he is indeed sucking it up. Just sayin'...

Oh, I do suck. But only if she asks nicely....:tongue2_1

 

[insanebikerboy]

And I don't mean about grading. I mean about straight-up PROCEDURES. (although grading is all over the map too).

And to add on to what Gator said, I be as specific to actually list the instructors who do that. It's bs that they do the procedures differently. Technique is one thing but a procedure should be taught first before even thinking about throwing in a technique.

 

[Nomar116]

I'll throw out my data point on the IFS discussion. I completed IFS Jan. 2008. The "new," difficult, syllabus had been in place at all schools for nearly 6 months.

There was still a big variance between the 6 schools. Some took it much more seriously than others. I watched 7 or 8 friends at my IFS school alone fail checkrides and have Performance Review Boards. It was a relatively small school and I was nearly the only student in the school that did not get sent to a board. A few ended in attrition. From talking to others I feel these same students at other schools would have slid right on through.

Review boards seem to do a very good job. They looked at the entire body of work (i.e. GPA, previous fitreps, ASTB, etc) but were still heavily influenced by IFS results. Several comments here have hit the nail on the head. Many instructors make it their job to weed out and attrite unworthy souls. I was very uncomfortable with this program putting the careers of Naval Officers in the hands of Joe-Schmo civilian because he works at such and such school. Especially with the lack of oversight NASC seemed to have.

Despite these criticisms, IFS is a program that is definitely headed in the right direction. They have some small glitches to work out but besides that it is very effective. I have felt much more comfortable and confident in both API and entering Primary. I have many friends who feel new-IFS really helped them in Primary. I’m much more able to visualize what I’m learning from pubs and in ground school than I would have been had I never had to preflight an aircraft, perform an EP, or make a radio-call.

Looking back on the training, API is the dinosaur. It is slow and inefficient. I’m glad I don’t have to put up with a three week curriculum but it can definitely get done. I did API just over a month ago and we must have been out by 1300 half the time. There was a lot of time to study; too much really. The biggest concern of half the students was “who can get a 100.” The extra time left students over-studying. Frankly, I never had to learn efficient study habits because I had so much extra time. In this way I would have really benefited from a shorter course.

One last thought… API as a three week TDY might make the most sense. Fly students down, put them up in the Q, run them through the course, and ship them back to wherever they’ve been hanging out pre-PCola. Add a second IFS location in Corpus and PCS and move them to where they can do IFS and Primary in the same area.

 

[Kickflip89]

IFS is a little weird. Most people I know made it through fine. However, I know a guy (SNFO) who got sent to a PRB and attrited because his IFS IP wouldn't endorse him to solo because he was having problems with landings. He only had somewhere around 23 dual landings when his checkride came up (I think I had at least 40).

So standards are a bit of an issue, and my point is that you shouldn't assume you can't get attrited for IFS. That said, I concur with Nomar: API and A-pool is pretty inefficient and can probably be improved by shortening the syllabus. I was thinking more like 4 weeks, though. 3 would be pretty tough.